Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 152
Like Tree7Likes

Thread: Does Communism still have a role to play, or is it dead?

  1. #101
    Властелин
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,339
    Rep Power
    13
    Can anybody else see a parallel with 9/11?
    I can.
    During the Cold War era, Western Europe was crying to save it from the USSR, hence the NATO, the bases, and the financial dependency of the entire world on the US to mutually maintain the whole thing.
    Ha-ha-ha-ha.
    The major idea of many NATO bases was to have the short-range nuclear weapon so close to the enemy that the enemy would have no chance to launch an attack.
    Nonsense.

  2. #102
    Завсегдатай Crocodile's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    село Торонтовка Онтарийской губернии
    Posts
    3,057
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcus View Post
    Ha-ha-ha-ha. Nonsense.
    That's very informative.

  3. #103
    Властелин
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,339
    Rep Power
    13
    В Западной Европе после войны были посажены американские марионетки, все мало-мальски независимые правители, как де Голль, хотели от американцев избавиться. Народ там во многом был за коммунистов и никакую НАТО не поддерживал.
    Все знали, что СССР новую войну не начнет, а Америка вообще была неуязвима, сейчас - тем более. Все американские планы были исключительно наступательными.

  4. #104
    Завсегдатай Crocodile's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    село Торонтовка Онтарийской губернии
    Posts
    3,057
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcus View Post
    В Западной Европе после войны были посажены американские марионетки, все мало-мальски независимые правители, как де Голль, хотели от американцев избавиться. Народ там во многом был за коммунистов и никакую НАТО не поддерживал.
    Alright, so first, please cite me saying that "the people of Western Europe were crying to save it from the USSR". I said "Western Europe was crying to save it from the USSR" and when we mention a country what we mean is the government in that country, i.e. very specific people. Some people liked the USSR, others liked the US. There is no way to issue a blanket statement saying anything about people in Western Europe in general. So, as a result of Yalta conference, the world was divided between the powers and obviously those politicians which allied with the designated power of their region got the support and others met the resistance. And those governments expressed and formed the "national opinion". And all those who serves in the military and sacrifice their lives 'for their countries' is actually serving the plans of the specific politicians with their limited understanding of what needs to be done. So, I'm not sure what you were laughing at.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcus View Post
    Все знали, что СССР новую войну не начнет
    That's interesting. The USSR had the mightiest ground army in the world and the best weapon in the world of the time and you're saying everybody knew the USSR will not start another war in 5-10 years? After it had successfully absorbed the entire Eastern Europe and crushed the entire Kwantung Army 'liberating' huge territories in a week? That statement is laughable.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcus View Post
    а Америка вообще была неуязвима
    Then why such small Japan attacked the US in 1942? Was the US less invincible then? Perhaps, Japan had more military strength in 1942 than the USSR in 1945?

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcus View Post
    сейчас - тем более.
    That's entirely another topic. All I'm saying - put yourself in the shoes of a NATO general. That general could be born in Canada, Australia, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcus View Post
    Все американские планы были исключительно наступательными.
    Ha-ha-ha. All military plans of a country which possess nuclear weapon are aggressive. No exceptions. The nuclear weapon in military service ensures the defense from any military intervention. Instead of making the defensive plans any nuclear country has plans for mitigating the risks of the nuclear weapon being destroyed by an enemy. And one of the strategic solutions is to diversify the locations and the methods of delivery. There are strategic missiles in the nuclear silos and the whole tactics of attack and defense of the silos, there are mobile nuclear units, there are nuclear submarines, aircraft, etc. If the enemy is successful in neutralizing the nuclear silos, it would be attacked by the nuclear bombs deployed from the aircraft launched from three or four military bases nearby. And it's good to have more bases, if some of them are destroyed, there would be others which would be able to launch the nuclear assault. The diversification in that case is a key for the strategic planning. If you find that nonsense, I think you should at least say what are the alternatives.

  5. #105
    Властелин
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,339
    Rep Power
    13
    Флота у Советского Союза не было, авиация была слабее американской, и сам он был разорен войной.

  6. #106
    Завсегдатай Crocodile's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    село Торонтовка Онтарийской губернии
    Posts
    3,057
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcus View Post
    Флота у Советского Союза не было, авиация была слабее американской, и сам он был разорен войной.
    Ok, so let me once more repeat what I said and what has caused so much laughter from your side: "During the Cold War era, Western Europe was crying to save it from the USSR, hence the NATO, the bases, and the financial dependency of the entire world on the US to mutually maintain the whole thing." The Western Europe was more afraid of the USSR than the US. It was actually Western Europe which catalyzed the Cold War. That process ultimately culminated in the Berlin Crisis. But, then the Caribbean Crisis broke out which made the US become more and more afraid for its own security.

  7. #107
    Властелин
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,339
    Rep Power
    13
    It was actually Western Europe which catalyzed the Cold War
    Ничего Западная Европа не делала. Холодная война началась из-за желания США подчинить себе мир и убрать единственного, кто этому мешает. Прошло 40 лет, прежде чем мешающий понял, чего от него хотят.

  8. #108
    Завсегдатай Crocodile's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    село Торонтовка Онтарийской губернии
    Posts
    3,057
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcus View Post
    Ничего Западная Европа не делала. Холодная война началась из-за желания США подчинить себе мир и убрать единственного, кто этому мешает. Прошло 40 лет, прежде чем мешающий понял, чего от него хотят.
    Would you be able to provide some logical and/or factual support to what you just said? Obviously, you know how the propaganda works...

  9. #109
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    904
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by nulle View Post
    T
    But they were sane enough to not try to implement it in practice.
    At least not in a way Lenin, Stalin & Co. did.
    They weren't in WWI by the time of occurrence of the communistic ideas in Europe
    Internal security fixed the problem, obviously

  10. #110
    Завсегдатай Crocodile's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    село Торонтовка Онтарийской губернии
    Posts
    3,057
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by nulle View Post
    At least not in a way Lenin, Stalin & Co. did.
    I think what Lenin and Stalin used to do is probably not the worst of all possible scenarios. We know there were lots of people who resisted the collectivization of the property and the communists had to prosecute those people. But, how many people would the communists have to prosecute if they would every try to enforce other things stated in the Communist Party Manifesto, for example "the community of wives?"

  11. #111
    Завсегдатай BappaBa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Нерезиновая
    Posts
    2,115
    Rep Power
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Crocodile View Post
    if they would every try to enforce other things stated in the Communist Party Manifesto, for example "the community of wives?"
    А если внимательно прочитать?
    Но вы, коммунисты, хотите ввести общность жен, - кричит нам хором вся буржуазия.
    Буржуа смотрит на свою жену как на простое орудие производства. Он слышит, что орудия производства предполагается предоставить в общее пользование, и, конечно, не может отрешиться от мысли, что и женщин постигнет та же участь. Он даже и не подозревает, что речь идет как раз об устранении такого положения женщины, когда она является простым орудием производства. Впрочем, нет ничего смешнее высокоморального ужаса наших буржуа по поводу мнимой официальной общности жен у коммунистов. Коммунистам нет надобности вводить общность жен, она существовала почти всегда. Наши буржуа, не довольствуясь тем, что в их распоряжении находятся жены и дочери их рабочих, не говоря уже об официальной проституции, видят особое наслаждение в том, чтобы соблазнять жен друг у друга.
    Буржуазный брак является в действительности общностью жен. Коммунистам можно было бы сделать упрек разве лишь в том, будто они хотят ввести вместо лицемерно-прикрытой общности жен официальную, открытую. Но ведь само собой разумеется, что с уничтожением нынешних производственных отношений исчезнет и вытекающая из них общность жен, т. е. официальная и неофициальная проституция.

  12. #112
    Завсегдатай it-ogo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    3,048
    Rep Power
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by Crocodile View Post
    So, if you put yourself in the shoes of a typical NATO high-level strategic planner, what should you do?

    1. Continue to have the military bases as widespread in the world as possible, and
    2. Prevent the other countries from joining the nuclear club.
    Nukes are very expensive and dangerous for the owner. The main reason to join the nuclear club is to protect oneself from the intrusion of a superpower. So the aggressive politics of USA (and NATO) is the main reason of the nukes' spread over the world nowadays. BTW you can surely remove North Korea from the "roadmap", cause it is already in club. Actually, USA provides help to North Korea each year. So, either a typical NATO high-level strategic planner have a problem with strategic planning or he takes NATO aggressiveness as something uncontrolled and tries only to reduce the consequences (mainly unsuccessfully).

    No?
    "Россия для русских" - это неправильно. Остальные-то чем лучше?

  13. #113
    Властелин
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    1,155
    Rep Power
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by it-ogo View Post
    Nukes are very expensive and dangerous for the owner. The main reason to join the nuclear club is to protect oneself from the intrusion of a superpower. So the aggressive politics of USA (and NATO) is the main reason of the nukes' spread over the world nowadays. BTW you can surely remove North Korea from the "roadmap", cause it is already in club. Actually, USA provides help to North Korea each year. So, either a typical NATO high-level strategic planner have a problem with strategic planning or he takes NATO aggressiveness as something uncontrolled and tries only to reduce the consequences (mainly unsuccessfully).

    No?
    More than 60 years have passed since the first and last actual use of nuclear weapons. The U.S. used it against their enemy at a war time, and everyone learned their lesson then. Now, these days any use of these weapons is totally unacceptable. Every sane government understands that. No U.S. war operation against dictators anywhere involved nuclear weapons. Now you say one has to have nuclear weapons to "protect themselves". Well, I think those who seriously consider resorting to this kind of weapon, no matter what the reason is, are insane and very dangerous folks, and it's only for that alone they deserve being taken down.

  14. #114
    Властелин
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    1,155
    Rep Power
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by it-ogo View Post
    Actually, USA provides help to North Korea each year.
    Would you care to provide any sort of evidence?

  15. #115
    Новичок
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    2
    Rep Power
    0
    Sorry, I'm not sure, but in my opinion, capitalism is not idealistic system to. Because it concentrate biggest part of capital in hands of a few people, multibillionaires. It give them unlimited power from rest people and create a different possibility between poor and rich.
    Communism proposed same possibility for everyone. Proposal to transfer private property the country. It means to share with every inhabitant. It humanistic, but not realistic. Because few rich people in the world understand how its important: freedom. equality. brotherhood.
    I'm sorry for gramma mistakes.

  16. #116
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    904
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric C. View Post
    Well, I think those who seriously consider resorting to this kind of weapon, no matter what the reason is, are insane and very dangerous folks, and it's only for that alone they deserve being taken down.
    So either governments of nuclear countries are all insane (including US) or you wrong. I think the second

  17. #117
    Завсегдатай it-ogo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    3,048
    Rep Power
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric C. View Post
    Would you care to provide any sort of evidence?
    Google helps.

    USA helps NK regime to keep stability from 1995. Actually, last about 2 years USA help reduced but it is mainly because China strongly increased help.
    "Россия для русских" - это неправильно. Остальные-то чем лучше?

  18. #118
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    904
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric C. View Post
    Would you care to provide any sort of evidence?
    I guess you have been banned in google
    US supplied food as an aid to NK up to 2009 then NK rejected - http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...rth-korea-can/
    Now they talking about resuming food aid - U.S., North Korea weigh resumption of food aid - Checkpoint Washington - The Washington Post

  19. #119
    Завсегдатай it-ogo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    3,048
    Rep Power
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric C. View Post
    Well, I think those who seriously consider resorting to this kind of weapon, no matter what the reason is, are insane and very dangerous folks, and it's only for that alone they deserve being taken down.
    From WWII nuclear weapon is used in diplomacy rather than in war. And it is perfectly effective.

    I don't judge who deserves what and seriously consider what. I said that after fall of USSR foreign policy of USA is the main reason of spreading nukes. Am I wrong?
    "Россия для русских" - это неправильно. Остальные-то чем лучше?

  20. #120
    Hanna
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by it-ogo View Post
    From WWII nuclear weapon is used in diplomacy rather than in war. And it is perfectly effective.

    I don't judge who deserves what and seriously consider what. I said that after fall of USSR foreign policy of USA is the main reason of spreading nukes. Am I wrong?
    No, that's a great observation.

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. What role does the letter у play in these sentences?
    By SoftPretzel in forum Grammar and Vocabulary
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: March 14th, 2009, 06:30 AM
  2. Role-model in Russian?
    By Scotland to Russia in forum Translate This!
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: December 2nd, 2006, 02:39 PM
  3. Communism Vs Democracy
    By Lynx in forum Politics
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: September 5th, 2005, 05:46 PM
  4. Pope is dead
    By Angel_of_Death-NZ in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 157
    Last Post: April 14th, 2005, 02:46 PM
  5. Change from Communism to ?????
    By ronnoc37 in forum Politics
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: August 31st, 2004, 03:54 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Russian Lessons                           

Russian Tests and Quizzes            

Russian Vocabulary